ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Division Spotlight
Aerospace Nuclear Science & Technology
Organized to promote the advancement of knowledge in the use of nuclear science and technologies in the aerospace application. Specialized nuclear-based technologies and applications are needed to advance the state-of-the-art in aerospace design, engineering and operations to explore planetary bodies in our solar system and beyond, plus enhance the safety of air travel, especially high speed air travel. Areas of interest will include but are not limited to the creation of nuclear-based power and propulsion systems, multifunctional materials to protect humans and electronic components from atmospheric, space, and nuclear power system radiation, human factor strategies for the safety and reliable operation of nuclear power and propulsion plants by non-specialized personnel and more.
Meeting Spotlight
2024 ANS Annual Conference
June 16–19, 2024
Las Vegas, NV|Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
February 2024
Latest News
Remembering Joseph M. Hendrie
Joseph M. Hendrie
To those of us who knew Joe, even prior to his appointment as chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it is an understatement to say that he was a larger-than-life member of the nuclear science and technology enterprise. He was best known to the broader community for two major accomplishments: the design and construction of the High Flux Beam Reactor (HFBR) at Brookhaven National Laboratory and the creation of the standard review plan (SRP) for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
In addition to the products of these endeavors becoming major fundaments to their respective communities, they were uniquely Joe. The safety analysis report for the HFBR was written essentially single-handedly by him. This was true of the SRP as well, which became the key safety review document for the NRC as it performed safety reviews for the growing number of power reactor applications in the United States. His deep technical knowledge of nuclear engineering and his extraordinary management skills made this possible.
Markku Lehtonen
Nuclear Technology | Volume 207 | Number 9 | September 2021 | Pages 1329-1350
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2021.1885952
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The nuclear sector finds itself at a critical juncture, in part because recent large nuclear power plant projects in Europe and the United States have suffered from what some scholars have called megaproject “pathologies,” that is, the chronic failure of large, complex infrastructure projects to fulfill the “iron triangle” criteria of project performance: cost, timetable, and predefined project prescriptions. To explore the framings of such problems within the nuclear community, this paper analyzes the ways in which 19 experts at the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) diagnose such problems and their underlying causes. The analysis draws on framing theory and on the scholarship on megaprojects, with semistructured interviews providing the empirical material.
The identified four frames highlight as key explanations for pathologies the “vicious circle” of lacking investment, erosion of skills, and construction problems; “bureaucratization and contractualization”; “broken markets”; and “complexity and nuclear-sector exceptionality.” Two overarching metaframes attribute the ultimate reasons to factors outside the projects and the nuclear community, notably to the lack of political leadership and the inability of the modern Western society to identify and pursue its own interest. The NEA frames bear significant resemblance to the alternative megaproject literature, which calls into question the very notion of pathology; stresses the complex, open systems character of megaprojects; and calls for flexibility and adaptability to better align megaprojects with their evolving context. However, the vital need to ensure and maintain an appropriate fit between nuclear-sector megaprojects and their ever-evolving environment deserves greater attention. Toward this end, introduction of OECD-style country peer reviews could constitute an opportunity toward collective “frame reflection,” in interaction with communities offering competing framings of the pathologies. Further research would be welcome on the role of the NEA in framing processes within the nuclear community and on the relationships between megaprojects and modernity in this high-risk industry.